Allahabad High Court
Ramachal Ram And Another vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 1 August, 2019
Bench: Neeraj Tiwari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 39
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10638 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ramachal Ram And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Surendra Kumar Chaubey,Santosh Kumar Rai
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned standing counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 4 and Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for respondent no. 5.
Considering the nature of order proposed to be passed, there is no need to issue notice to respondent no. 6.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner no. 1 was appointed as Head Master in Harijan Kanya Pathshala, Wajeermalpur, Azamgarh (hereinafter referred to as "institution") on 8.7.1983 and petitioner no. 2 was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the aforesaid institution on 19.8.19783. Prior to 2009, condition of service of teachers being governed by U.P. Recognized Basic School (Recruitment and Condition of Service of Teachers and other Conditions) Rules, 1975 was applicable in the said institution and after 2009, Government has framed a Rule pertaining to appointment of Social Welfare Department known as U.P. Social Welfare Department Teachers Service Rules, 2009. In the year 2004, seven posts had been sanctioned and approved by State Government and petitioners were selected through proper selection committee. Presently, petitioners are working continuously in the said institution without any complaint, but arrears of salary and current salary have not been paid for which Additional Director Social Welfare Directorate has issued letters dated 13.10.2017 and 1.12.2017 directing the District Social Welfare Officer to take action in accordance with law. For redressal of grievance, petitioners have moved representations before respondent no. 4, but till date, the same has not been decided. Lastly, he submits that a suitable direction may be issued to respondent no. 4 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners and pay arrears of salary and current salary.
Learned standing counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 4 submits that representation of the petitioners shall be considered and decided strictly in accordance with law at the earliest.
Under such facts and circumstances, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to move fresh representation before respondent no. 4 and in case any such representation is filed within two weeks from today, respondent no. 4 is directed to consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law maximum within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of the order.
It is made clear that Court has not adjudicated the case on merits and it is upon the respondent no. 4 to decide the representation of the petitioner after considering the relevant Rule as well as Government Orders occupying the field.
Order Date :- 1.8.2019
Arvind
